Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT15 S2 Q19 Explanation

Without information that could only

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsFlaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Without information that could only have come from someone present at the secret meeting between the finance minister and the leader of the opposition party, the newspaper story that forced the finance minister to resign could not have been written. No one witnessed the meeting, however, except the minister’s aide. It is any of his powerful political enemies, but by his own trusted aide.

What this question is testing

Flaw

Your task

Describe the reasoning error the argument actually commits.

Common trap

Answers that name a real logical flaw the argument doesn't actually make.

Winning move

Articulate the gap in the reasoning yourself, then match it to the choice that describes that gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
19.

The argument commits which one of the following errors

Answer choices

  1. Correct65% picked this

    drawing a conclusion on the basis of evidence that provides equally strong support for

    Why this is right

    Answer A is correct.

    Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  2. Trap5% picked this

    assuming without warrant that if one thing cannot occur without another thing’s already having occurred, then the earlier thing cannot occur without

  3. Trap2% picked this

    confusing evidence that a given outcome on one occasion was brought about in a certain way with evidence that the same outcome on a

  4. Trap1% picked this

    basing its conclusion on evidence that is almost entirely irrelevant to the

  5. Trap26% picked this

    treating evidence that a given action contributed to bringing about a certain effect as though that evidence established that the given action by itself

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free